The question is if its appropriate to compare logical machines, which are built on things secondary, a-posteriori to the primary aspects of human cognition--that is to say logic--with the primary, biological, a-priori aspects of cognition which are in some sense inscrutable. I myself do not believe that we will never be able to comprehensively understand the way in which our minds work, only religion leaves mysteries up to God. But I think that using scientific empirical logic to understand how we are able to perform judgements such as those made with scientific empirical logic will never yield the proper result; judgement itself must be investigated. Something I don't think many researchers in the field of neural-networks are capable of doing.
Biological architectures may not be the best possible, but empirical evidence demonstrates that they can result in intelligences ranging all the way up to sentience.